Page:Hempstead's Reports.pdf/419

394   ; nor is it possible to make a decree fixing any one side line, or any place of beginning for a specific tract of land.

Our opinion is, that on either of the grounds stated, the petition should be dismissed, and the decree below affirmed.

Ordered accordingly.

 In district court. In supreme court.
 * 1) Spanish claim rejected, (1) because conditions not complied with, and (2) because there was no survey of the grant.
 * 1) In 1796, when Delassus was commandant of the post of New Madrid, he exercised the powers of sub-delegate, and had authority, under the instructions of the governor-general of Louisiana, to make conditional grants of land.
 * 2) He made a grant to Clamorgan, who stipulated on his part to introduce a colony from Canada to cultivate hemp and make cordage for the use of the king's vessels; but these conditions the grantee failed to perform.
 * 3) By the Spanish laws and ordinances, these conditions had to be performed before the grantee could obtain a perfect title. If the Spanish governor would have refused to complete the title, this court, acting under the laws of congress, must likewise refuse.
 * 4) After the cession of Louisiana to the United States in 1803, Clamorgan could not legally take any step to fulfil the conditions; and the case must be judged of as it stood the 3d March, 1804.
 * 5) The difference between this and Arredondo's case, 6 Peters, 706, explained.
 * 6) The cases of Arredondo, 6 Peters, 691; Soulard, 10 Ib. 100; Wiggins, 14 Ib. 334; Menard v. Massey, 8 How. 293; and Boisdoré, 11 How. 63, cited and approved.

April, 1849.—Petition in District Court, under act of 17th June, 1844, for the confirmation of a Spanish claim, determined before Hon. Benjamin Johnson, district judge.

Albert Pike and D. J. Baldwin, for petitioners.

S. H. Hempstead, district attorney, for the United States.

OPINION OF THE COURT.—In this case, I do not deem it necessary to give reasons at length for the decree I shall render,